Comments on: Torture Works, So Does Pedophilia

By: ziggy

ziggy — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 20:18:13 +0000

In what sense are the legal arguments cogent? They're bullshit opinions based upon the same sort of tortured parsing of definitions that Nazi awyers once used to twist law into a mockery of itself. The result is the justification of something completely contrary to our fundamental principles. When you observe such a result, you know there's something wrong with the logical steps that got you there. "No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment." That's from Article Five of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted by the United Nations General Assembly. The United States is a signatory. We've also got The Eighth Ammendment to the Constitution of the United States, which has been understood to clearly proscribe torture since the nation was founded.

By: TexasBuckeye

TexasBuckeye — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 19:05:34 +0000

Where is that an established fact? The ACLU summary reports of documents obtained under FOIA do not state that any detainees were tortured to death.

By: termo

termo — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 14:06:04 +0000

It’s a friggin’ fact that it made a difference!!!

This is the difference between responsible leadership and some utopian idea of kumbaya.

If you knew that there was a distinct possibility of a major terror attack and a detainee knew the details you do everything in your power to get that information to save possible hundreds or thousands of American lives. To draw the line before harsh interrogation techniques is irresponsible and is the difference bewteen real leadership and some kitchen table Monday morning quarterbacking.

By your statements you would choose to sacrifice those hundreds or thousands of lives and that I find deplorable. That is the difference between real world and myth.

By: viking

viking — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 05:48:59 +0000

Au contraire,

I read the legal opinions shortly after they were published a few years ago. Back then, I disagreed with the Bush admin about Iraq, etc. but their legal opinions in support of these measures were not specious arguments. As much as it annoyed me at the time, I had to concede that their arguments were cogent.

You are free to disagree with their legal opinions and argue one of your own but the point is, reasonable minds may differ over the arguments and supporting jurisprudence. That cannot and does not equate with illegality, sorry.

By: UKforDems

UKforDems — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 03:26:46 +0000

Berfle, for the first time in a long time I have agreed with you entirely.

By: Jules

Jules — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 01:51:42 +0000

Larry, in your example, you are equating “young children” used for sexual gratification to the terrorist suspects being “tortured”. These two are by no means equivalent. I think people can debate all day what the definition of torture is. To me waterboarding is not torture. Having ones head sawed off is torture.

By: Not in my name

Not in my name — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 00:32:01 +0000

The “approved interrogation techniques” were every bit as unlawful as the beatings that resulted in death, the exposures that resulted in death, the chokings that resulted in death, etc. You’re suggesting some of this was proper and lawful and some was not. None of it was lawful. That’s the entire point. It’s all the same evil bullshit.

By: TeakwoodKite

TeakwoodKite — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 00:12:13 +0000

The final resting place of an American president. I would vote for you.

By: Patrick Walker

Patrick Walker — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 22:07:10 +0000

It should also be noted that Blair lied to Congress twice and disobeyed a direct order from President Clinton when it came to dealings with Suharto and Indoneisa back during the ’97 Asian financial crisis.

A crisis that, showing how small the Washington and CFR is, Geithner misdiagnosed to the detriment of millions of Asians.

By: viking

viking — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 19:59:44 +0000

No. The articles report that individuals committed beatings which resulted in the death of one, possibly two, individuals. Those beatings were unlawful and the individuals responsible were properly identified and prosecuted.

You fail to distinguish between unlawful battery resulting in murder and approved interrogation techniques. The article itself fails, sloppily so, to clearly state the distinction but its plainly there in black and white. None of the unlawful acts were approved, condoned or tolerated. Those acts were investigated prosecuted and punished.

By: Not in my name

Not in my name — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 19:45:43 +0000

You’re suggesting these are cases of torture gone wrong, because it wasn’t conducted by our cadre of highly trained torture professionals?

By: viking

viking — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 19:31:00 +0000

You fail to see the distinctions which are plainly laid out in all these articles. All these links report that the military investigated, charged and prosecuted those who committed homicide. How do you get from our military/intelligence officers prosecuting homicide to U.S. sponsored torture?

There is nothing in any of these articles that even hints that the beatings which caused the deaths were approved interrogation techniques. Sloppy, sloppy analysis.

By: Sonic Ninja Kitty

Sonic Ninja Kitty — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 19:00:51 +0000

There is a very interesting article at http://www.russiatoday.ru/Top_News/2009-04-19/_America_lives_in_a_fascist_state____Gerald_Celente.html

Then click on “discuss it” at the bottom and read the second comment (by ‘Count Cash’).

The more I connect the dots the more I think some serious revolting is going to take place.

By: Not in my name

Not in my name — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 18:56:06 +0000

misc. autopsy findings:

http://action.aclu.org/torturefoia/released/102405/

———-

“Brutal interrogation techniques by U.S. military personnel are being investigated in connection with the deaths of at least five Iraqi prisoners in war-zone detention camps, Pentagon documents obtained by The Denver Post show.”

http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_0002157003

———-

“In U.S. Report, Brutal Details of 2 Afghan Inmates’ Deaths”

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/20/international/asia/20abuse.html?_r=1

———–

“U.S. Military Says 26 Inmate Deaths May Be Homicide”

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/16/politics/16abuse.html

By: viking

viking — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 18:23:17 +0000

…when we’re engaged in a symmetrical military action against another recognized nation-state who is also a signatory, sure. Al quaeda, Hamas, Hizbollah, etc. are not nation-states and our engagement with them is anything but symmetrical.

By the way, the rabble rousers who kicked Britain out a few hundred years ago often utilized unheard of guerrilla tactics.